Latest news with #JPMorganChase
Entrepreneur
2 hours ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
JPMorgan Is Opening 'Affluent Banking' Centers. Here's Where.
The bank is planning to open 31 new financial centers by the end of 2026. In May 2023, JPMorgan Chase acquired a "substantial majority of assets and assumed the deposits and certain other liabilities" of First Republic Bank after it collapsed and was seized by regulators. The deal also included First Republic's brick-and-mortar locations. Two years later, JPMorgan is announcing what it's doing with the real estate: opening 14 new "J.P. Morgan Financial Centers" in four states that are "thoughtfully designed to cater to the needs of affluent clients," according to a company statement. Related: JPMorgan Chase Says AI Could Cut Headcount By 10% in Some Divisions: 'We Will Deliver More' "Through these Financial Centers, we are redefining how affluent clients are served, offering a highly personalized level of service that is backed by the global capabilities of JPMorganChase," said Jennifer Roberts, CEO of Chase Consumer Banking, in a statement. Two locations are already open, 14 will open in 2025, and then JPMorgan says it is doubling the total to 31 by the end of 2026. The new branches are opening (mostly) in the former First Republic locations that JPMorgan acquired in May 2023, including Palm Beach, Florida; Napa, California; Madison Avenue, New York; and Cambridge, Massachusetts, according to the release. "These new Financial Centers offer a highly personalized service model, providing greater flexibility to meet clients' needs with exceptional attention and care," Roberts said. Related: 'I Defend Your Right to Buy Bitcoin': JPMorgan Will Let Customers Buy Bitcoin, Though CEO Jamie Dimon Still Thinks It's Like a 'Pet Rock' Clients with more than $750,000 in qualifying deposits and investment balances are welcome at the new, office-based model, which was inspired by First Republic, JPMorgan notes. Customers who don't live near a new center can still access the services at their current location or remotely. Chase also offers a lower-tier called "Private Client," which is for clients with $150,000 or more in qualifying deposits and investment balances. It is available in all 5,000 Chase branches nationwide, per the release. Related: 'This Has to Stop': JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon Outlines How to Run a Successful Meeting
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Jamie Dimon warned Trump's agenda would push U.S. allies toward China—Greenland already says it may ‘look elsewhere' for mining investment
Amid growing unease with President Trump's foreign policy, which JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warns could isolate the U.S. under an 'America alone' doctrine, foreign governments like Greenland are rethinking their investment alliances and considering alternatives such as China. Dimon has emphasized the importance of maintaining strong economic and military partnerships, a warning that resonates as Greenland—home to vital untapped resources—signals frustration with U.S. diplomacy and explores other global investors to support its development goals. Foreign governments are beginning to shop around when it comes to drumming up investment, potentially stepping away from ties with Donald Trump's America. The White House's foreign policy under President Trump has raised eyebrows for a range of reasons, whether it's been renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, claiming Canada will be adopted as the 51st state, or making bids to bring Greenland under its control. And that's before you consider tariffs. The altered, often unpopular, stance of the Oval Office has led to economic experts like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon to question whether Trump's 'America First' policy may end up as 'America alone.' The biggest concern in that scenario is that America's economic and military allies may turn their backs on the White House and instead look to another foreign powerhouse, China, for support. Writing in his annual letter to shareholders earlier this year, Dimon explained, 'Keeping our alliances together, both militarily and economically, is essential. 'The opposite is precisely what our adversaries want.' Unfortunately it seems that this is precisely what's happening when it comes to some political conversations in Greenland, which Trump has threatened to 'get' using military force, despite the country being an autonomous territory of Denmark. 'We want to develop our business sector and diversify it, and that requires investments from outside,' said Naaja Nathanielsen, Greenland's minister for business and mineral resources, in an interview with the Financial Times. And when asked if that might include working with China, she added, 'We do want to partner up with European and American partners. But if they don't show up I think we need to look elsewhere.' Trump has long held an interest in Greenland citing 'national and international' security concerns, given America's proximity to the island. The fact that Greenland geographically sits on a potential flight path from the U.S. to Russia is also of note. But as well as the geographic proximity to the U.S., Greenland is also home to a wealth of untapped raw materials, including 25 of the 34 materials that Europe deems 'critical' materials. The Trump 2.0 team has made its interest in securing such assets clear, having signed a deal with Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky on precisely this issue in order to secure a military partnership between the two. To make matters more complex, Nathanielsen told the FT a memorandum of understanding on mineral development with the U.S. is due to expire soon, having first been signed under the previous Trump administration. She added, 'We sort of hoped that the Trump administration would be more willing to engage in dialogue with Greenland about the mineral sector development. We got a bit more than we asked for, because we have no wish to be American.' Of course, with heightened tensions between the U.S. and China at present, the latter nation may not want to rock the boat any further and risk a return to April's tit-for-tat trade war. China may be resistant to sign a deal with Greenland precisely because officials don't want to 'provoke' anything, added Nathanielsen. Trump's comments about folding Greenland into America are 'disrespectful and distasteful,' the Greenland minister added. Her view is fitting with the vast majority of her peers, with a January poll finding 85% of people on the island didn't wish to be part of the United States. Trump's political ally and major donor, DOGE boss Elon Musk, has also said he 'hoped' the people of Greenland would want to join the U.S. and would be 'welcome' if they did. The survey conducted by pollster Verian, commissioned by the Danish newspaper Berlingske earlier this year, found that just 6% of Greenland's population wanted to join America. Trump's lobbying was accompanied by a visit to Greenland by one of his sons, Donald Trump Jr., which was criticized by some lawmakers in the country. But the nation will be conscious that despite its apparent distaste for Trump's tactics, it does not want to burn bridges with its close military and economic ally. As Nathanielsen put it, 'We are trying to figure out, what does the new world order look like? In those terms, Chinese investment is of course problematic, but so, to some extent, is American.' This story was originally featured on
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
2025 Global 2000 Methodology
JP Morgan Chase ranked No. 1 on the Global 2000 in 2024, 2023 and 2022. Corbis via Getty Images For the 22nd consecutive year, Forbes is ranking the world's largest public companies. We compile our Global 2000 list using data from FactSet to screen for the biggest public companies in four metrics: sales, profits, assets and market value. Our market value calculation is as of April 25, 2025, closing prices and includes all common shares outstanding. All figures are consolidated and in U.S. dollars. We use the latest-12-months' financial data available to us on April 25, 2025. We rely heavily on the databases for all data, as well as the latest financial period available for our rankings. Many factors play into which financial period of data is available for the companies and used in our rankings: the timeliness of our data collection/screening and company reporting policies, country-specific reporting policies and the lag time between when a company releases its financial data and when the databases capture it for screening/ranking. We quality-check the downloaded financial data to the best of our ability using other data sources and available company financial statements. We first create four separate lists of the 2000 biggest companies in each of the metrics: sales, profits, assets, and market value. Each of the 2000 lists has a minimum cutoff value in order for a company to qualify: sales $5.9 billion, profits of $399 million, assets of $14.1 billion and market value of $7.9 billion. A company needs to qualify for at least one of the lists to be eligible for the final Global 2000 ranking. This year 3,385 companies were needed to fill out the four lists of 2000, each company qualifying for at least one of the lists. Each company receives a separate score for each metric based on where in ranks on the metric's 2000 list. We add up all the scores for all four metrics (equally weighted) and compile a composite score for each company based on their rankings for sales, profits, assets and market value. We sort the companies in descending order by the highest composite score and then apply our Forbes Global 2000 rank. The highest composite score gets the highest rank. Publicly traded subsidiaries for which the parent company consolidates figures are excluded from our list. For most countries, the accounting rules for the consolidation of a subsidiary is when the parent's ownership (control) of the subsidiaries stock is more than 50%. Some countries accounting rules allow for the consolidation of a subsidiary at less than 50% ownership. We exclude companies where we don't have access to reliable or timely data—this year, that included Russian companies, which do not have financial data reported on FactSet or other reliable data sources since prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022.
Finextra
3 hours ago
- Business
- Finextra
Training AI Agents Like Behavioral Scientists to Excel at Preventing Scams and Fraud: By Roy Zur
As scams become more advanced and personalized, the tactics used to manipulate individuals are increasingly rooted in behavioral psychology. What once required blunt deception now relies on nuance: fraudsters exploit victims' fears, biases, and emotional vulnerabilities with surgical precision. With fraudsters now equipped with generative AI tools and attacking with psychologically driven tactics, it's not enough for banks to rely solely on traditional fraud detection systems. AI agents need to do more than flag suspicious transactions to keep up. They must be trained to understand people (both victims and scammers) and have the capabilities to deliver personalized insights, warnings, and conversations to help customers recognize and break free from a scammer's influence. Some of the world's largest financial institutions are beginning to realize that this training is necessary. In-house behavioral science teams like those led by Elizabeth Huppert, PhD, from JPMorganChase are now working hand-in-hand with fraud operations teams. The goal: to design technically accurate and psychologically effective intervention strategies. At Charm Security, after years of analyzing transactional data and behavioral patterns, we've learned that warning people that they're being scammed is very different from convincing them of it. The main challenge is moving from detection to effective prevention to 'Break the Scam Spell.' This shift reflects a broader truth: modern scam prevention is as much a psychological challenge as a technological one. Fraudsters know how to apply social engineering to induce urgency and exploit confirmation bias. If banks want to stay ahead of today's fraudsters, their AI tools must do more than transform back-office functions. They must be able to detect anomalies and respond with empathy, clarity, and personalized engagement. To achieve this goal, we must train AI models to think like behavioral scientists. In practice, this means simulating scam scenarios, reverse-engineering past incidents to understand emotional triggers, training AI with billions of scam identifiers, and clustering users by behavioral risk profiles, similar to how credit risk is modeled. Some banks have begun exploring real-time conversational interfaces that interact with customers during transactions. Instead of simply blocking a suspicious payment, these tools initiate a dialogue, explaining the risk and giving the customer a chance to reconsider. Early results suggest this approach significantly improves both scam prevention and customer satisfaction while mitigating reputational risk and lowering the false positive rates in certain cases. Of course, not all interventions are created equal. Poorly executed friction, like generic prompts, scripted questions, or robotic messaging, can erode trust. Worse, it can cause vulnerable users to disengage entirely or allow scammers to take advantage of the predictable scripts to manipulate their victims. This is where psychology matters most. A well-trained AI agent should know how to de-escalate, listen, and guide a user back to safety without shame or confusion. Ultimately, the future of scam prevention will depend on advanced AI models constantly trained on the latest scam trends and human vulnerabilities, increasing their ability to detect and intervene in real time. Banks that treat customer protection as a human challenge, compared to a compliance one, will be best positioned to lead. Training AI agents like behavioral scientists may sound unconventional, but in today's threat landscape, it's one of the most effective moves a bank can make.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
LinkedIn Survey Reveals Remote Work Might Be Getting Harder To Find — What That Means for You
When the COVID-19 pandemic struck in 2020, the entire world went inside. Many businesses that stayed open relied on remote workers to continue their operations, and, as the pandemic subsided, many employers found that remote work was still a viable option. Check Out: Try This: In 2025, however, it seems like the party is ending, at least for those who want to work remotely. In addition to a number of well-known companies very publicly saying that they wanted workers to return to the office — JPMorgan Chase, Starbucks and Amazon being just a few — the general marketplace appears to be shrinking for remote workers. At least, that's the conclusion of a recent LinkedIn survey. But is remote work really getting harder to find, and is it a trend that will continue? Here's what the hard numbers say. Also, check out some of the top remote jobs that pay $100,000 or more. LinkedIn's Workforce Confidence Survey, released in March 2025, shows that remote work has been steadily declining since 2020. In October 2020, for example, 46% of employees worked remotely, while 39% were mostly onsite. Those numbers had flipped as of February 2025, with 55% working mostly onsite while just 26% worked remotely. Hybrid work has remained relatively constant with a slight uptick in recent years, going from 12% in October 2020 to 16% in February 2025. Read More: Interpreting statistics can be a tricky business. On the one hand, it seems clear from the data that the trend in remote work is decidedly downward, while more and more workers are returning to the office. But the pandemic was a once-in-a-lifetime event, a true statistical outlier that made 'normal' statistical analysis irrelevant. While the number of remote workers has been cut almost in half over the past four to five years, it's still extremely elevated relative to the normalcy that existed before the pandemic. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, just 6.5% of workers in the private business sector worked from home in 2019. That's just one-fourth of the number of remote workers today. Looked at another way, there are four times as many remote workers in 2025 as there were in 2019. While the trend in remote workers may be down, it really had nowhere to go but down after peaking in 2020. In spite of the overall percentage decline, many companies are still actively hiring remote workers. For companies that were founded during or after the pandemic, remote work may have been all that they ever offered. Others simply find that remote work still fits into their overall business plan. According to U.S. News & World Report, these are just a few of the many companies that still hired remote and/or hybrid workers as of late 2024, either exclusively or in conjunction with in-office workers: Coinbase Atlassian Autodesk Cash App Kelly Kforce Splunk Yelp In addition to the slow return to normalcy as the effects of the pandemic subsided, the tightening of the overall job market may also be contributing to the slowdown in remote hiring. Although mass layoffs have not yet hit the broad economy, many companies are at least slowing their hiring. If economic conditions worsen, however, then the job market may shrink even more. This, in turn, may also reduce the number of remote jobs available. Remote work may be trending down from the days of the pandemic, but this doesn't mean they're going away. While the absolute number of remote jobs may be shrinking, remote work is still much more prevalent today than it was six years ago, before the pandemic. It may take a bit more legwork, but if you're a qualified candidate determined to find a remote position, there's likely still one out there waiting for you. More From GOBankingRates 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value 6 Hybrid Vehicles To Stay Away From in Retirement This article originally appeared on LinkedIn Survey Reveals Remote Work Might Be Getting Harder To Find — What That Means for You
